and physical strength and energy decrease. Inclinations and disposition become feminine. The mujerado loses his position in society as a man. He takes on feminine manners and customs, and associates with women; yet, for religious reasons, he is held in high honor.”47 The phallic ceremonies of the Pueblos take place in the spring, when the life principle is exceedingly active throughout all nature.
In all probability the “botes” of the Montana Indians and the “burdachs” of the Washington tribes serve as masculine hetaræ to the chiefs and medicine men, though this has not been definitely determined. Dr. Holder described a typical “bote” of the Absaroke tribe in the New York Medical Journal, 1889. This androgyne, in many respects, resembled the mujerados of the Pueblo Indians, and probably served a like purpose in his tribe.
According to Ross, a Konyaga woman, when she has a good-looking boy, dresses him in girl’s clothes and brings him up as a female. When he arrives at a suitable age he is sent to wait on the priests of the tribe and is introduced by them into the sacred mysteries of their cult; in fact, he becomes a masculine hetara.
When we read of such things we feel pretty much as Herodotus felt when he saw the naked women of Mendes submitting themselves openly ες επιδειξιν ανθρωπων to the embraces of the sacred goat.48 To the Greek historian this act was simply horrible (τερας); and yet these Egyptians experienced no repugnance whatever. To them it represented the incarnation of the deity, and was, therefore, a sacred and holy action, just as masculine hetarism is regarded as a holy profession among the Konyagas. Phallic hetarism is one of the sacraments of the Konyaga church, and, as such, it is held in all that reverence and awe with which the savage devotee endows the mysteries of his faith.49
The ancient Hebrews, ancestors of one of the most ancient of the civilized races of the earth, held it in high honor. Even wise King Solomon, in the days of his old age, turned from the abstractedly pure religion of his father “to Astoreth, the goddess of the Zidonians, and to Milcom, the abomination of the Ammonites.”50 He was guilty of constructing a “high place” for Chemosh, “the abomination of Moab.”51 Any good modern biblical encyclopedia will tell the reader about Astoreth and her worship, and what the “high places” and the “groves” were.
Even the “good kings,” such as Asa, Amaziah, et al., did not remove the high places and the groves, for we read that, notwithstanding the fact that these kings did that which was right in the sight of the Lord, they did not remove the high places. In the case of Amaziah, it is written:
“And he did that which was right in the sight of the Lord, yet not like David, his father; he did according to all things as Joash, his father, did.
“Howbeit, the high places were not taken away: as yet the people did sacrifice and burnt incense on the high places.”52 All of the so-called “wicked kings” were phallic worshipers, and both male and female hetarism flourished during their reigns. We read of Josiah, a “good king,” “And he broke down the houses of the sodomites (kedescheim) that were by the house of the Lord.”53 Here, in unmistakable terms (kedescheim), the phallic act of the hetara is specified.
Herodotus wrote: “Almost all mankind consort with women in their sacred temples, except in Greece and Egypt.”54 This is a queer mistake for a Greek to make, yet this historian is noted for his unreliability, and we should not feel surprised at this gross error. Concerning the Aphrodite of Abydos, what she was and what took place in her temples, is a matter of history. Indeed, this goddess was surnamed Porne! In Corinth, delubral hetarism was openly practiced; also at Bubastis and Naucratis in Egypt. Royal princesses were pallacides in the temple of Ammon; in fact, they took pride in the title of pallakis!55 “It is known what excessive debauchery took place in the ‘groves’ and ‘high places’ of the ‘Great Goddess.’ The custom was so deeply rooted that in the grotto of Bethlehem what was done formerly in the name of Adonis is to-day in the name of the Virgin Mary by Christian pilgrims; and the Mussulman hadjis do likewise in the sanctuaries of Mecca!”56 57
But let us return to primitive peoples, from whose customs and beliefs we can learn what our own ancestors must have believed before the besom of civilization swept aside the crudities of savagery.
The Khonds of India are phallic worshipers, and, in the practice of their religion, Priapus saves many a girl who would be, otherwise, offered up on the bloody altars of their divinities. The pregnant woman is sacred, hence, religious prostitution is exceedingly prevalent. But it frequently happens that some unfortunate creature, who is not pleasing to the shamans, is seized, tied to the stake and butchered.58 As the blood flows down and deluges the ground, “the divine spirit enters into the priest and inspires him.”59 This sacrifice is of itself a phallic rite; the blood-offering is supposed to be exceedingly acceptable to Earth, the mother of all things. Blood is the essence of the life-giving principle; hence, the essence is returned to the great Giver, as a propitiatory offering.60
In point of fact, the worship of the generative principle is everywhere prevalent in India.61 In the Lingam, or holy altar of the Brahmins, we see a conjunction of the male and female sexual organs, while religious prostitution, in the shape of hetarism, crowds the inner courts and corridors of almost every temple in the land with hierodules and bayaderes. The Vedas abound in references, either direct or indirect, to phallic worship. Indeed, according to some authorities, the Hindu Brahma is the same as the Greek Pan,62 “who is the creative spirit of the deity transfused through matter.”63
Hundreds of pages have been written on snake-worship, in which a wonderful amount of metaphysical lore has been expended. Mr. Herbert Spencer devotes several pages to the snake, and the reason for its appearance in the religion of primitive peoples. He ascribes to savages a psychical acuteness that I am by no means willing to allow them, inasmuch as he makes them give a psychical causation for their adoption of the serpent as a deity, such as no ignorant and uncultivated savage could have possibly evolved. I am inclined to believe that, like all great students and thinkers, Mr. Spencer has a hobby, and that this hobby is animism or ancestor-worship. When he gives out, as a reason for the snake’s almost universal appearance in the religions of primitive peoples, that the latter consider it an animal which has assumed the returning ghost, double, or soul of an ancestor,64 I think that he is very much in error. There are very few primitive folk, comparatively speaking, who believe in metempsychosis. In all probability, when a race, like the ancient Egyptians, for instance, had reached a high degree of civilization, they idealized many of their religious beliefs and customs; hence, the serpent probably lost its initial and simple symbolical meaning, and stood for something higher and more ethical during the reign of the great Pharaohs, and the Golden Age of the Greeks and Latins. I am positive, however, that the snake’s original significance was wholly phallic in character, and that its adoption as a symbol was simple and material, as I explain elsewhere in this essay.65
I am forced to this conclusion by its presence among phallic symbols in almost every race that practiced or practices a worship of the generative principles. The Pueblo Indians, whom I have mentioned elsewhere in this treatise, regard the snake symbol with reverence; the Moqui Indians have their sacred snake dance, in which they worship the reptiles, handling the most vicious and poisonous rattlesnakes with seeming impunity; the Apaches hold that every rattlesnake is an emissary of the devil;66